Samuel Cabral Cruz

@johnmartel I did check on your repo I forgot about this issue. It did work as expected. For the branch protection not being applied, I experienced the same issue but...

For the time being, I made a simple make recipe with the following snippet after the execution of mockgen: ``` @head -n 2 $(destination) > $(destination).tmp @grep -v '^//' $(destination)...

@ivanrein I just tried on one of my repositories and I have the same problem as you.

@evancharlton I did enable the feature and I see the check detecting the unresolved conversation, but nothing seems to prevent the merge in the case of failing check  As...

@evancharlton if you guys are only looking for a solution, I do have an [action](https://github.com/marketplace/actions/unresolved-review-threads) that does exactly this, but it is less accurate and does not integrate as gracefully...

I started a [discussion](https://github.com/github/feedback/discussions/7827) in the github feedback repository.

It would be really easy to perform this correction. I think the only thing we got to do is to modify the alt_dict which contains the field renaming information.

If for any reason the authors of the package do not want to modify this aspect, a simple tweak to correct the situation would be the following: ```{python} new_alt_dict =...

@Phyks When you say keep the two behaviors you mean that we could simply set the ```alt_dict``` as an input parameter to ```__init__()``` method of the ```BibTexParser``` class. However, we...

@Phyks That would definetly works also, but if the same "problem" arise for any other field we will face the same problem. Modifying the ```alt_dict``` manually is really close to...